Part 129

“It afterwards kept swimming about for a considerable time, and I had an opportunity of judging of its length so far as visible, compared with the hulls of two trading schooners of about 100 tons each some little distance from us. When apparently the same distance away as the traders, and going slowly, it appeared fully as long from the head to the eighth bump as the length of one of the schooners on waterline, which would be at least sixty feet; but how much of the animal remained under water I had no means of estimating. The head seemed to be square or blunt, but I did not see under it, and did not notice its eye or mouth. The bumps, or dark raised portions, appeared to me to be about eighteen inches above the water, and three or four feet long, with a distance of four or six feet between each bump. I could not say whether the bumps were the convolutions of a snake-like body or the raised portions of a large body underneath the water. I am inclined to think the latter, as the bumps always kept the same distance apart, and appeared to be protuberances on the back of, possibly, a lizard shaped reptile. That it caused a large displacement was evident from the waves and commotion raised when swimming at or near the surface, as I could distinctly trace its progress with the naked eye at a distance of from two to three miles.”

“We lost sight of the creature after leaving the mouth of Loch Hourn, but just as night fell I noticed it going past at a rapid rate in the direction of Kyle Rhea, a narrow strait which separates Skye from the mainland. I afterwards heard that it was seen that same evening by fishermen and others passing through these narrows, and it struck them all at the time as being quite different from anything they had been accustomed to.”

“The above is a bare statement of fact, and was written down by me immediately after getting ashore, while my recollection of the creature’s appearance was perfectly fresh and vivid. Having cruised for many summers amongst the West Highland lochs, I am perfectly familiar with the appearance and habits of whales, seals, porpoises, &c., which can often be seen in great numbers. To these, the creature I have described bore no resemblance whatever.”

“GILBERT BOGLE, Newcastle.”

From this gentleman I received three splendid pen-drawings, representing the animal witnessed by him on that occasion, but alas too late to be reproduced for this edition.

1872, August 22 and 23. (N^o. 139 and 140, see p. 322).--On one of these days it seems also to have been seen by Lord MACDONALD’S steam yacht in Loch Hourn.--Eye-witnesses: Lord MACDONALD, of Armadale, Skye, Rev. Mr. MC. NEILL, minister of Skye, Mrs. G. C. LYSONS, of Painswick, Strand, and others.--(R. P. G.)

1873, March.--Mr. BASIL CLOCHRANE, Capt. R. N., of Windlesham House, Bagshot, Surrey, on board the Orontes, from the West Indies to England saw a sea-serpent.--Letter from eye-witness to Capt. GEO. DREVAR (see p. 329).--(R. P. G.)

1875, July 8 and 13. (N^o. 144 and 145, see p. 329).--The letter from Capt. GEO. DREVAR to the Editor of The Calcutta Gentleman, 1876, February (?), contains no news about the two appearances.--(R. P. G.)

1875, July 17.--Off Plymouth, Cape Cod Bay.--Captain GARTON of the ss. Norman, and several people on board the ss. Roman.--Atlantic Monthly of June, 1884.--(R. P. G).

1875, July 30.--On board the yacht Princess, between Nahant and Egg-Rock.--Mr. FRANCIS W. LAWRENCE, Mrs. LAWRENCE, Rev. ARTHUR LAWRENCE, rector of St. Paul’s Church, Stockbridge, Mass., Miss MARY FOSDICK, ALBION W. REED, ROBERT O. REED, Mr. J. KELSOE and Mr. J. P. THOMAS, both of Swampscott.--Atlantic Monthly of June, 1884.--(R. P. G.)

1876, September 11. (N^o. 146, see p. 341).--An account in the Times of 1876, December 28, furnishes no news.--A rough drawing made by Mr. ANDERSON, and now in the possession of ROBERT HOLT, of Liverpool, owner of the steamer, hardly agrees with the depositions, and cannot give the idea of a salamander, a newt, or a frog.--(R. P. G.)

1876.--Some Pitcairn islanders saw a sea-serpent near Norfolk Island.--Letter from one of the Pitcairn islanders to Mr. PALMER of Liverpool.--Liverpool Mercury, 24 February, 1877.--“Mr. JOHN ADAMS and his boat’s crew saw it near Norfolk-Islands”.--Letter from Mr. MARCUS LOWTHER, Capt. R. N. of Penge, London, S. E., to Capt. GEO. DREVAR (see p. 329).--(R. P. G.)

1877, March.--Mr. R. A. PROCTOR, in his “Strange Sea-Monsters” (Gentleman’s Magazine) says amongst other assertions: “naturalists have been far less disposed to be incredulous than the general public”. If it were only true! Hitherto at least zoologists have not admitted even the possibility of the existence of a still unknown species, called “sea-serpent”.--(R. P. G.)

1877, July 15.--About two miles off the mouth of Gloucester Harbour, Mass.--Mr. GEORGE S. WASSON and Mr. B. L. FERNALD.--Atlantic Monthly of June, 1884.--(R. P. G.)

1878, summer.--Fjord near Aalesund.--Naturen, 1884, n^o. 2.--(Forwarded to me by Prof. R. COLLETT).

1882, October 11.--Near Bude, Cornwall.--Eye-witnesses: Rev. E. HIGHTON, Vicar of Bude, with several friends.--The Times of October 12, 1882.--(R. P. G.)

1883, August 1.--The Evening News of this date communicates and gives partly a review of Mr. LEE’S Sea Monsters Unmasked.--(R. P. G.).

1884, February.--Prof. R. COLLETT, of Christiania, wrote a paper in the Norwegian language headed Something on the sea-serpent (Naturen, 1884, n^o 2).--The writer does not seem to be a believer in the existence of a sea-serpent. The arguments against its existence are 1. A sea-serpent of considerable dimensions would in the course of centuries not have failed to have been observed and caught. 2. In the depth of the Ocean there are undoubtedly creatures, which as yet are unknown, but all specimens caught, be they as abnormal as possible, are referred to existing well-known forms. 3. No known vertebrated animal, can, on account of its structure, move in vertical undulations.--Against these arguments I may say: 1. Before, 1861, and 1873 the krakens were fables, and yet they existed! Mr. RAFINESQUE SCHMALTZ &c., see p. 431, line 6 from below to p. 432, line 5 from above. 2. Do “naturalists” not constantly refer the sea-serpents to existing well-known forms? 3. Among Reptiles the Plesiosaurians had a long neck and this neck could certainly be bent vertically; among Birds the swans are able to bend the long neck vertically, and all Mammals can move in vertical undulations, especially the Mustelina, Lutrina, and Pinnipedia; and the horizontal position of the tail of the Sirenia and Plagiuri is a strong proof that their ancestors moved in vertical undulations.--Prof. COLLETT’S private opinion is that the sea-serpents observed in the fjords of Norway, were mostly specimens of the basking shark. I, however, firmly believe that the Norwegian fishermen know the basking shark so well, that such an animal would never have been taken by them for a sea-serpent! They know these sharks and their habits far better, I should think, than Prof. MITCHILL, Prof. MANTELL, Prof. MELVILLE, Mr. BUCKLAND and Prof. LÜTKEN all together. Moreover in none of their descriptions there is question of a backfin, or of backfins, which are the first visible parts of a basking shark!

1884, June.--The Trail of the Sea-Serpent, by Mr. J. G. WOOD, in the Atlantic Monthly.--A very interesting paper, with historical notes and many new appearances, however, not without some zoological inaccuracies. He believes the sea-serpent to be an elongated whale, a Basilosaurus or an animal allied to it, and that the short neck of the Basilosaurus may be an error of the restorer (nota bene!).--(R. P. G.).

1884, June 2.--The Manchester Guardian gives a review of Mr. J. G. WOOD’S paper, and as Mr. WOOD comes to the conclusion that the animal must be an elongated whale, the Manchester Guardian ends (how insipid!): “Very like a whale”.--(R. P. G.).

1885, October 4.--Near Umhlali (Umlazi?) in Morewood’s Bay, South Africa.--(R. P. G.).

1886(?), summer.--Prof. HEDDLE informs me that a few summers ago, (and from one sentence of his letter I deduce that it was before 1887) a sea-serpent was seen in Loch Duich. “The description was very much what we are familiar with”.

1886, August. (N^o 158, see p. 376).--The description of the eyes as having a greenish hue struck me so, that I at first did not attach belief to the assertion (see p. 377 and 497), but now I know that this is not an impossibility, as I since observed that the tapetum lucidum of the eye of a dog may reflect the daylight as well in a reddish as in a greenish hue.

1887, July 30.--Prof. HEDDLE wrote to me on May 6th., 1892:

“I would just say that having taken bearings on the land, in order to estimate--(of course roughly)--the length, and the speed, I set down the length at from 60 to 65 feet. There was a very low flat head like a large skate, say 4¹⁄₂ feet--a gap not so great,--ten “hummocks” increasing in bulk and altitude towards the central one, but not much--gaps not so great as the size of the hummocks, next a space, about equal to two hummocks, then three hummocks, the central one largest, the last small”.

“The thing I saw appear three times--first time end on was a worthless observation, except that on this occasion the whole was rushing through the water. On the other two occasions there was hardly any forward motion at all. The whole disappeared at the same moment, and reappeared also at the same moment, about two seconds thereafter more than its own length in advance; so that there must have been either an exceedingly rapid rush under water--or a second animal. The disappearance and reappearance were both without the least splash; but at the moment of disappearance the second time the foremost two of the last three hummocks coalesced into one”.

“During one of the appearances I got the focus of the binoculars so sharp that I distinctly saw water falling over towards me, between some of the hummocks and myself. There was no consecutive filling up of the interspaces whatever, or appearance of vacuities where the hummocks had but now been”.

“There was certainly no vertical serpentine motion--and I could see no lateral one”.